Slashdot Mirror
Windows XP N a Bust
mushupork writes "CNN has an interesting article about the just-released Windows XP N.
From the article: 'Computer distributors and manufacturers are so far showing little interest in the new product, which compels consumers to choose their media player and download it from the Internet.' Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?" Similar to an earlier article about the same issue from the PC Makers end.
sounds familiar
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
Why would it? I think it'll open their eyes to how much "good" Microsoft's bundling does for them.
Why would the (lack of) avilability of a media player influence my OS decision?
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Would there be a point in ordering that the N version is the only one allowed to be sold in Europe? Obviously, there won't be much interest in a stripped down version of the same product, especially if the old product is still available.
see a Text Widget
Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
No. Next question?
"What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
which compels consumers to choose their media player and download it from the Internet.' Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?"
I didn't think the media player was the onlything keeping users of Windows XP or any version. To me, it is compatability with current programs such as Office and Adobe products, and there are attractive alternatives. Media players? Eh, there are 100s of media players for all platforms, it's not that big of deal.
"I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father's protection." -- Sigmund Freud
Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
Huh? Why would the fact that people are not interested in choosing their software package push people towards linux, where that unwanted feature is commonplace!??!
Did the OEMs suddenly lose all their imagination? Or are there not as many "partership" opportunities with media players?
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
It's because XP-N was the wrong "punishment" to inflict on MSFT.
People like getting free stuff bundled with things that they buy. At worst, don't use WMP and download something else.
When you force the removal of the free media player as a court decision, it's the consumers who feel punished. Now they have to go out of their way to get a media player.
What would have been a better punishment for Microsoft would have been forcing them to open up their APIs and documentation, publish their source code, or split the company up into competing units, or revoke their license to do business.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
No it just means people don't ask, and companies don't want to be seen as giving the 'reduced version'. People don't understand this, and as far as I am concerned, the whole problem with Microsoft and its abuse was cut down to some fairy arguments, and then those were made to stick.
It does a lot worse things.
Anyway, show me a linux distro aimed at home users whose default install doesn't have mp3/ogg/xmms etc.
Happy microsoft got slammed? Yes. Give a shit about the hole XP N thing? No.
Will it open people eyes? No, because form their perspective nothign has changed, unless you meant the distributors, who work on supply and demand, and will start taking space away from their m^2 floors as and when it will be profitable to do so.
Right now, they don't see it. Now the price of hardware is exacerbating the percentage of cost that goes to an OS, *that* might make a difference.
Tallyho.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
I doubt that. The article says: "We'll continue to sell the old version because it's obviously better value for our customers," said Gina Jones, spokeswoman for PC World, Britain's leading PC retailer.. In other words, this is a battle between the new and old versions of XP. For the same price, which would you rather buy? The one that comes with the free media player or the one that does not have a media and forces to user to have an internet connection and download a player just to play CDs? I am guessing that most Europeans will look at the two products and choose conventional XP, without evening looking down the Mac aisle.
People aren't interested in a Windows without a media player - it was the competing businesses who were complaining.
Borrow money from a pessimist - they don't expect it back.
Wastes your time in mind. Why would anyone buy a product with less in it when there's already an established product with more, when the more is really shitty? Tell me. I want to know.
The EU's decision, let's face it, was really fucking stupid and will do no good for anyone. Perhaps, instead, they should've done something more crippling, like take out Media Player in EVERY version and force people to download it. But no, that would hurt Microsoft more than not at all.
ShortFormBlog: Writing a little. Saying a lot.
XP N is supposed to be a bust. MS doesn't want you to buy the version some government made them create. They want it to die a quiet death after it serves its purpose of compliance.
Humpty-dumpty sat on a wall and had a great fall. Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
I'm not one to back M$, especially around here, but this whole Windows N thing just seems stupid. The EU doesn't like Media Player being coupled with the OS, so they make MS release a version of the OS sans MP, BUT then they still allow the old version to be sold AND they are the same price.
I don't know, maybe i have taken too many Econ classes, but this seems like it is a horribly inefficient punishment that will solve absolutely nothing -- hell it won't even give them those warm fuzzies you get from doing the right thing because it isn't the right thing.
The bottom line is that no rational consumer -- TFA mentioned like 2 people that this would not apply to -- would buy this version of windows. Sorry EU but you really missed the boat (or chunnel as it may be) on this one.
Humpty-dumpty sat on a wall and had a great fall. Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
This could be the next slashdot meme.
Step 1. Repeat the headline
Step 2. Append "Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?".
Example: New Independent Lego Journal Launches. Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
Perhaps we're looking at this the wrong way. The point of forcing an alternative offering is to prevent lock-in to certain software and media types. If I still used windows, I'd feel compelled to pick up a copy of N and use it purely to maintain my own personal dignity. At least then I could say I didn't PAY for WMP.
And let is encourage our windows using friends to do likewise.
Trying to use sarcasm in text-based forums does not work.
Note to self...
1. Browse old story at +5 Funny
2. Post +5 Funny comments here verbatim
3. Watch Karma go through the roof
4. ???
5. Profit!
It's too early to draw conclusions, but this would point to a conclusion 'customers gripe, but happy enough with Microsoft product' given the freedom to choose.
:)
* So now above someone is already mentioning a totalitarian and roughly monopolistic response of "make the choice between XPs illegal, make only the N- version available! Then customers can't buy it!"
* Yeah, we see involving the government in software is *all* about increasing freedom. meh.
* More to the point, if retailers aren't buying into -N, their customers aren't expressing much need.
What, this whole lawsuit business must have been about competitors's business, not about what the customer wanted! (Shock! Amazement!)
why would they compete? they would all just be their own monopoly... ok maybe not the business division... a better plan would be to spilt them up and give them each their own copy of windows source and then let them compete!
....................
The "N" thing is a dumb solution. MS should have allowed to BUNDLE anything they wanted. However there should be clear and clean options to include or exclude any of the bundled packages and a clear and clean way to REMOVE any packages an OEM chooses to install. Ever install Debian using the Sarge Installer? Ever use Aptitude on Debian? You can install as much or as little as you like and you can uninstall anything you like. Why can't Windows do that? The only bundled piece I have a REAL problem with is MSN Messenger. You can't friggin uninstall it! I actually wrote a "do nothing" application called msmsgs.exe and copied it over the real one to get rid of it!
That saw the headline as.
"Windows XP busts a nut."
"I am a kernel in the linux army"
I'm not sure I'd call them shortsighted.. They successfully extorted hundreds of millions of dollars out of MS all in the name of "consumer choice" which we now know was a load of BS.
On the Windows front, there's a whole wackload of alternatives for Windows Media Player that goes on and on and on. In that respect, there's no decent photo viewer other than iPhoto (Picasa is there for PC), no decent consumer video editor other than iMovie (plenty for PC) and so on and so forth. No one has competed with Apple on this front. Why? Because it's their by default? Why isn't Apple getting sued?
Ya ya, because Apple is not a "monopoly" you say. But guess what? If Microsoft was *forced* to strip Windows Media Player/Internet Explorer/MSN Messenger and all their other additions, then why shouldn't Apple be forced to strip Quicktime/Safari/iChat/iPhoto/iMovie/iTunes from OS X? After all, it would give them an unfair advantage. They can start marketing that they have all these great features right out of the box while Windows only comes with Notepad.
Suffice to say Microsoft is doing absolutely nothing to stop others from installing other browsers/media players or whatever people want. So Real Player has every opportunity to gather attention, and in fact their player used to be quite popular. Then it started to be spyware ridden, over-bloated interface and horribly slow player, and they lost it.
The reason that XP-N isn't selling is obvious - it costs the same as regular XP, and is worse. What a stupid "remedy."
Bundling is considered bad by most pre- and post-Chicago school economists is that it uses monopoly power in the tying product (in this case, the operating system) to attempt to gain monopoly power in the tied product (the media player). Microsoft's strategy, so the EU and Justice Department allege, is to force me to take their crappy Media Player along with their operating system, locking me into it and creating a second monopoly from which they could then profit further - by jacking up prices for song downloads, e.g.
There are a number of reasonable critiques of this analysis which I won't get into here. However, the EU decision obviously provides no remedy to Apple or Real or whoever if Microsoft is allowed to continue selling the goods as a bundle, especially since doing so imposes no additional cost to them other than packaging costs (the marginal cost of the Media Player code on an XP CD is zero). If they were out for anything other than Gotcha!ing a big American company, they would force MS to sell the two pieces of software separately, or at least make MP available as a free download.
Of course, Microsoft doesn't want people to pay just for the parts of Windows they actually use - it's 200 bucks for the whole kit and kaboodle. For that reason, they don't offer XP-N at a discount, even though they might make more money by doing so.
beware the jabberwock, my son! the jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Personally I'd rather have Microsoft's choice as my default than have the alternatives.
What are the alternatives? Companies are going to pay Dell to be the default media player. Because they're paying to be a free product, you know there's a hook.
Would you rather have a free Microsoft media player, or a free RealPlayer that's going to remind you what a better experience you could be getting with the upgrade player every time you want to play some media?
At least, thanks to the amount of scrutiny Microsoft stuff gets, we know what we're getting.